Adaptive Capacity of the Finish Line Grantees: Using Advocacy Skills in Tumultuous Times October 20, 2011 IAC Annual Grantee Meeting Jung Kim

 The ability to “monitor, assess, and respond to internal and external change” is a hallmark of effective advocates (TCC Group)  As experienced advocates, grantees have adapted in many ways to be who and where they are today Adaptive Capacity 2 TCC Group. “Advocacy Core Capacity Assessment Tool (Advocacy CCAT) Report Introduction.” New York, NY: TCC Group. Available at Accessed August 15,

 Economic Downturn  Political Upheaval  Major Federal Legislation An Extraordinary Environment Narrative Grants Start of FL Grants Loss of 1.9 million jobs GDP declined (0.5% annual rate) Intensifying political rancor in anticipation of 2010 elections New president, emergence of health reform Midterm elections CHIPRA (Feb 4) ARRA (Feb 23) ACA (Mar 23)

 Grantees continually assessed what was needed to reach the Finish Line –Health coverage goals and strategies –Resources –Partners and legislative champions  Coverage expansion remained the long-term goal; shorter-term goals became more of a moving target Grantees Respond 4

5. Leveraging technical assistance and external support 1. Building strategic partnerships 2. Monitoring and analyzing policy 3. Implementing strategies and campaigns 4. Developing and delivering messages effectively Grantees Adapted Along Five Dimensions 5

 Coalitions took on growing importance –Shared responsibilities –Access to multiple areas of expertise –Flexible work groups and ad hoc committees  Grantees continually assessed their partnerships both within and outside their coalitions 1. Building Strategic Relationships 6

7 “We learned that a semi-fluid Workgroup structure and a targeted but overarching scope allowed the Workgroup to remain nimble as the context changes. The additional focus on developments at the federal level and the passage of ACA… allowed the Workgroup members to forge new relationships and strengthen existing ones.”

1. Building Strategic Relationships 8 “While these groups did not oppose the expansion, we had to monitor how their efforts on their priority issues affected support for the expansion and stay ahead of any unintended negative portrayal of the expansion.” “Our strong relationships with these faith leaders and our reputation for fact-based advocacy on behalf of children was key in having these leaders agree to communicate with the Governor on [coverage for legal immigrants].”

 Grantees served as a vital and growing resource for credible information and analysis on coverage issues  Grantees provided increasing guidance to state agencies as agency staff and other resources declined 2. Monitoring and Analyzing Policy Options 9

10 “Our constant presence made it impossible for anyone to forget kids or to diminish the goal. It sounds simple, but ‘being there’ made all the difference when it came to drawing attention to the issue and keeping it in the forefront…. For instance, the talk about mandating children’s coverage quickly turned punitive and we were able to respond with facts and data and headed off what could have been a very dangerous precedent for states.” (Iowa) “The depth of policy knowledge is even more critical in being able to, and being invited to, participate in state policy decisions.”

 Grantees promoted governors’ initiatives that benefited children’s coverage, strengthening ties with the state executive branch  Grantees pursued a mix of public and “behind-the- scenes” approach 3. Implementing Strategies and Campaigns 11

“The enactment of health care reform and the importance of a couple of the options in that bill caused us to put an increased emphasis on public education relating to what that bill does and what the key policy choices will be for Wisconsin.” “We opted during critical points of this grant period to avoid drawing public and/or media attention for the program so as not to point to the program or its expansion as an option for further cuts. We instead worked behind- the-scenes with citizens and policymakers to maintain the momentum… in targeted communities.” 3. Implementing Strategies and Campaigns 12

 Grantees focused on positive messaging, first developed as part of Narrative Communications project  Grantees adapted their messaging to the environment  Grantees tailored both messaging and messengers for different audiences 4. Delivering Effective Messages 13

4. Delivering Effective Messages 14 “We felt most effective however when [our] messages were used in the media and by legislators without being attributed to our campaign or our individual partner organizations. This type of ‘infiltration’ of key messages was an indicator to us that our message resonated with our audiences and caused true shifts in the framing of these issues.”

4. Delivering Effective Messages 15 “[The Oregonian’s] editorial on the success of Healthy Kids… was riddled with catch phrases that Children First uses regularly to discuss Healthy Kids. We attribute much of our message skills to the great support we have received from Spitfire. Whether or not they referred to the op-ed that we submitted or not, their messages were right in line with our main talking points on health care.”

 Grantees particularly valued tailored, state-specific assistance from Georgetown CCF and Spitfire Strategies  Grantees expanded their connections and resources and valued learning opportunities through Finish Line  Grantees felt that extending the scope to their work raised their legitimacy and appeal among stakeholders –Coverage is one step in improving the lives of children 5. Leveraging Technical Assistance and Support 16

5. Leveraging Technical Assistance and Support 17 “Timely analysis, feedback, and guidance significantly improved the quality of materials and presentations, kept our messaging consistent and focused, and made us more efficient, which was critical due to the short amount of time before the 2009 legislative session….” “By providing a lens of activities and strategies that are occurring in other states, we were able to gauge quickly which efforts might be successful in Washington.”

5. Leveraging Technical Assistance and Support 18 “[W]e are increasingly aware that focusing solely on insurance is not enough to improve the health of kids. We also have to focus on access and quality to ensure not only that kids have health insurance but that they can access affordable, high-quality care.”

 Finish Line grantees possessed the core advocacy skills needed to adapt during a period of unprecedented change  The Foundation’s funding, technical assistance, and flexibility served as a critical support  Information from the grantee progress reports align closely with data gathered independently Concluding Thoughts 19

Coverage of Children Improved Since Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 and 2010 American Community Survey One-Year Estimates

 Are these findings consistent with your experience in and perspectives of the Finish Line project?  Are there any major points that should be added, refined, or corrected?  Would dissemination of these findings be useful in your work? Whom do you see as the key audiences?  Are there ways the Foundation could partner with you to disseminate these findings? Discussion Questions 21